Bavarian Alps losing 'almost all glaciers'

Sadly, all glaciers everywhere, have been there for billions of years, and never down-sized until now. Ice ages are completely fictional and have never come and gone.

Normally, I have no problem spotting humour, irony and sarcasm on forums, but you have got me this time. You can't really be serious?????

Sure Mr. Pepsi is serious; why not? Approximately half of the entire American population will glady dismiss decades of scientific research, as well as the entire western scientific tradition, when it doesn't serve their reactionary, ignorant positions.

Scientific Research that hasn't proven squat!

The crux of the matter isn't whether the climate is changing — the climate is always changing. The frain with whether mankind, specifically CO2 produced by mankind, is the driving force. To date, no scientist as been able to PROVE that mankind produced CO2 is the driving factor.

Soothfast, they hav not proven that CO2 itself is the driving factor. All ... ALL ... the computer MODELS hav fallen short. No one ... NOT ONE ... has been able to match past data with past reality. Yet the Warmers want us to believe that these failed models can rightly forecast the climate in the years to come.

Furthermore, IF the CO2 were the driving factor and IF the earth were warming as an outcome of it, that would be a good thing! We are at the end of the average inter-glacial warming period ... we're due for another ice age! It would be best to stave that off as long as we can!

And more, warm is good ... say it with me ... WARM IS GOOD!

Warmer weather means more food for mankind. It takes less energy to cool a building than it does to warm it. WARM IS GOOD!

And do those glaciers feed any rivers in Germany?

@EinWolf

The crux is you still did not get the point:

Global warming does not mean that the temperatures rise and the weather is nice. It means the climatic extremes aggravate: extremely hot or extremely cold temperatures, very strong (thunder)storms, heavy rainfall and floodings. In my youth, such heavy storms as we have now were completely unknown in South Germany. Now, we have them more or less regularly.

Everybody who open their ears and eyes will notice the change. You don't have to be a scientist.

Warming up sounds good but it isn't.

OkieinBerlin...the bavarian alps are located in germany, not America.

Go to googlemaps and enter 'bavarian alps' and you'll see for yourself + learn a little geography.

Here is a great 1 hour audio interview that all might find interesting:

Eric Karlstrom - Behind The Green Curtain

http://www.redicecreations.com/radio/2012/06/RIR-120619.php

natural climate change vs. climate change propaganda, Maurice Strong, the UN and the dark side of the green movement.

Just turn it on while you are cleaning up or just chillin.

Red Ice Radio is good stuff :)

Haha. I love my daily fix of hackery @ theLocal.de. God knows, I love a small intimate readership. And with 'news' like this, there is no danger of that changing.

@ Floriansamsel ... Nice soundbite but not true. After Katrina the chickenlittle Warmer claimed that Katrina was just the beginning ever increasing hurricanes due to "climate change" ... well, turned out they were wrong ... AGAIN.

The tornadoes that ripped thru the US ... global WARMING ... wrong AGAIN. that warmer temperatures make for weaker tornadoes ...

OTOH, let's look at some REAL history. The MWP (Medieval Warm Period) was a time of increased food and more exploration. The following cold snap ... not so good.

Warm is good, cold is bad.

CO2 is 0.038% of the atmosphere. Mankind's portion of that is even smaller. Water vapor is a MUCH more powerful greenhouse gas and there is a LOT more of it than CO2. Attempts to "prove" that CO2 exerts a "forcing" effect hav fallen flat outside of carefully control experiment in a jar. Even then the outcomes and causes were debateable.

Yu hav a WEAK theory not supported by anything more than poorly written computer models ... GIGO ... Garbage In Garbage Out.

It doesn't help the Warmer's cause that folks like Hansen over at NASA has been caught more than once with their hands in cookie jar fudging the data. Total lack of creditability.

So we've gone from "There's no such thing as global warming" to "There's global warming, but it's not our fault!". That's progress! It only took 60 years to get here.

I was going to link to a youtube video from the 1950s about global warming, but apparently that is against the rules of The Local as they deleted my post and I had to try again. It exists if you want to go find it. Just search for global warming 1950s. It's the first hit.

I also wanted to link to a famous cartoon. In it, someone is complaining at a climate summit, saying, "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?". What if indeed.

@catjones

Don't go calling Bavarians Germans ,they are from the free state :-)

Seems to me that this all began, though not noticeable back then with the beginning of the industrial revolution. An event that only occurred once in our global history. The emissions ramped up over the last 160 or so years and now the results are staring us in the face. Check out the picture at the beginning of this article. If we seriously started today (not likely to happen ) to drastically reduce toxic emissions we wouldn't reap results for about a century. The problem is so big that it's everyone's problem...which makes it nobody's problem. Sad, but true.

Let's see, the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) study showed no net global temp increase since 1998. CO2 still rising..... temps still flat. So..... if the temp in the Alps is rising twice as fast as not at all, that must mean that the temp in the alps isn't rising at all. Changing precipitation patterns? Less snow? Climate changing from what we convinced ourselves was the way it has always been and the way it always would be?

Sun getting very quiet for this time in the cycle. This happened before..... like so many other things on Earth. It got colder then.

CO2 is plant food.

And the warmers like to forget about a very recent study that showed that the polar regions have been ice free in the prehuman era. Didn't the vikings settle greenland "make note of that name" it is now ice. There were glaciers all the way down into south dakota, wisconsin. But those disappeared thousands of years ago. Slightly preindustrial I would think. Would the ecomentalist's on the local care to explain those events away. Yes I agree that we should seek to try a lower impact lifestyle. But it should not be mandated by the government nor socialist professors who's agenda is about control as opposed to climatic concerns. It's a means to an end for both of those parties.

@EinWolf & Co.

You seem to me like dinosaurs, big and strong but a bit slow in thinking because of rather small brains.

If you really believe what you are posting here, you must be deaf and blind. On the other hand: what else should we expect from people who come from a part of the world where many think that health insurance is communism?

Now, you may repeat your "warm is good" until your brain runs dry (large parts of the US do so already - which is quite good and absolutely normal, right?)

@Floriansamsel

Well then. If you are such a smart person. How come the first thing that came out of your mouth were insults. As opposed to answering questions like the one's I posted?

I repeat. SCIENTISTS have shown that in prehistoric times the arctic HAS had ice free era's. And since prehistoric times predate the industrial era. How can that be. The fact is. Hard climatic data only dates back a few hundred years. There is even some evidence showing a connection with rapid heat index increases and the solar cycle. In fact I just spent a few days in the Swiss Alps. There are valley's there that were carved by ice. Yet there has not been any ice in the lower valleys for thousands of years. How can this be. As folks of your ilk ALWAYS blame the lack of ice on mans industrial might. When in fact the ice was mostly gone thousands of years before the industrial era..

So. Mr I'm smarter than everyone else. Can you not see that the earth does have cycles. The earth is constantly changing. there is the same amount of water as there was when the earth came to be. (other than the stuff we have shot into space) It just changes form and moves around. And of course with international borders we are not free to follow the rain as was done in the past.

@zeddriver

Alright, Mr. Smarter-than-everyone-else, if you feel insulted, I do apologise because I didn't mean it but let me tell you: don't dish out if you can't take it. You don't seem to notice the provocation in your own words, do you?

Back to the subject: what you say about climatic changes is right, such changes have always taken/will always take place but those in prehistoric times took ages, so long mankind can't even imagine, not just a century or some few decades. What we experience now is man-made and not natural. Independent scientists say so, too. Of course, there are also others who will tell you the opposite because they are paid by the industry.

If you found the Swiss Alps in good order that's fine (let's wait and see) but you cannot dispute the changes in the Bavarian Alps and that these are fast and very alarming.

By the way, I have just read another article today: Greenland is melting, too. Perhaps, we'd better evacuate New York and all the other cities along the coasts because warm is not only good, it will be also wet, very wet (cool, everyone's going to have their own swimming pool!).

What I meant to say is: use your brains and don't stop thinking. This everything's-normal-and-I-can't-change-it-anyway attitude is much too easy. So, it's not a question of smartness but a question of mental laziness (no need to feel offended, I don't say you're stupid - mind the difference!).

Stay smart - cheers!

A warmer.

@AnimuX

I wasn't offended by you. What gets me hot under the collar is the premise of the whole climate change debate. The environmentalist's point their boney finger at me and say you are the problem human.

Clearly one of the best possible solutions to a lot of issues. I.E. Energy in general is Hydrogen. Unfortunately environmentalist's tend to protest every option that is put forth. But, As a former member of the Sierra club. I can tell you what their ultimate solution is. Get rid of people. Of course they will exclude them selves as the are so much more in tune with the earth than you or I. I'll give you an example. While i was still a member. I received a phone call from the Sierra club HQ in San Francisco asking me to support their resistance of a timber sale in the Black hills of South Dakota. I asked why. As trees can be replanted and harvested again. He had no answer. I also asked him what would be the alternative for building homes. They protest mining of ores. So steel is out. They protest oil. So plastic, foam are out. I also asked him since the environmentalist's oppose all these things. How was it not hypocritical on the clubs part to be calling me on a phone made of plastic. In a concrete, And steel building. He had no answer. In all the meetings I went to. The over riding talk was about earth against humans. and they felt that it was their duty to stand in support of the earth and not humans. They proposed that the state should take away all private property. "according to a lot of environmentalist's" Only the government is smart enough to own anything. I'm not sure about that. The government sure can't manage money.

So when they (environmentalist's) start in with the latest "the sky is falling scenario" They rarely if ever state what a solution to the problem is. If they were truthful and stated what they truly think the solution should be. There probably would be a bounty placed on their heads by the citizens.

The government tells me that I need to sacrifice to help with the environmental issues. Yet, The very same government places huge restrictions on what I can and can't do. All in the interest of my safety and helping to prolong my life. Maybe the government should let me do what i want. Drive without a seatbelt. Drive fast. Why should I wear a helmet? So on the one hand they tell me that they want me to live for as long as possible. Then tell me that I'm a negative impact on the environment because I'm alive consuming stuff for far to long.